Legal Opinion

In Re Gundelfinger

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 19, 1927No. Docket No. 1429PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKnight, J.

Petitioner was arrested for violating the provisions of a municipal ordinance, and seeks to be discharged from custody on a writ of habeas corpas.

The city and county of San Francisco maintains an ordinance imposing a license tax upon various classes of business conducted within its boundaries. Section 83 thereof reads as follows: “Every person, firm, or corporation engaged in the business of buying or selling mining stocks, bonds, state, county or municipal stocks or bonds, or stocks of incorporated companies or evidences of indebtedness of private persons or of incorporated companies,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Banta v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Directors of Fallbrook Irrigation District v. AbilaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. New England & Savannah Steamship Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Farrell v. Board of TrusteesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Ransome-Crummey Co. v. BennettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sullivan v. FoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  2. Badger Meter Inc. v. Vintage Water Works Supply, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2004
  3. Barker v. City of Cincinnati, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API